Pages

Follow Sunlit Uplands by E-Mail

Friday, August 30, 2013

Will Boehner Stop Our Rogue President?

The next 72 hours will be decisive in the career of the speaker of the House. The alternatives he faces are these:

John Boehner can, after “consultation,” give his blessing to Barack
Obama’s decision to launch a war on Syria, a nation that has neither
attacked nor threatened us.

Or Boehner can instruct Obama that, under our Constitution, in the
absence of an attack on the United States, Congress alone has the
authority to decide whether the United States goes to war.

As speaker, he can call the House back on Monday to debate, and
decide, whether to authorize the war Obama is about to start. In the
absence of a Congressional vote for war, Boehner should remind the
president that U.S. cruise missile strikes on Syria, killing soldiers
and civilians alike, would be the unconstitutional and impeachable acts
of a rogue president.

Moreover, an attack on Syria would be an act of stupidity.

Why this rush to war? Why the hysteria? Why the panic?

Syria and Assad will still be there two weeks from now or a month
from now, and we will know far more then about what happened last week.

Understandably, Obama wants to get the egg off his face from having
foolishly drawn his “red line” against chemical weapons, and then
watching Syria, allegedly, defy His Majesty. But saving Obama’s face
does not justify plunging his country into another Mideast war.

Does Obama realize what a fool history will make of him if he is
stampeded into a new war by propaganda that turns out to be yet another
stew of ideological zealotry and mendacity?

As of today, we do not know exactly what gas was used around
Damascus, how it was delivered, who authorized it and whether President
Bashar Assad ever issued such an order.

Yet, one Wall Street Journal columnist is already calling on Obama to assassinate Assad along with his family.

Do we really want back into that game? When John F. Kennedy and
Robert Kennedy explored the assassination option with Fidel Castro,
blowback came awfully swift in Dallas.

Again, what is the urgency of war now if we are certain we are right?
What do we lose by waiting for more solid evidence, and then presenting
our case to the Security Council?

Kennedy did that in the Cuban missile crisis. U.N. Ambassador Adlai Stevenson made the case.

And the world saw we were right.

If, in the face of incontrovertible proof, Russia and China veto
sanctions, the world will see that. Then let John Kerry make his case to
Congress and convince that body to authorize war, if he can.

But if Obama cannot convince Congress, we cannot — and ought not — go
to war. The last thing America needs is an unnecessary,
unconstitutional war in that God-forsaken region that both Congress and
the country oppose.

Indeed, the reports about this gas attack on Syrian civilians have
already begun to give off the distinct aroma of a false-flag operation.

Assad has offered U.N. inspectors secure access to where gas was
allegedly used. It is the rebels who seem not to want too deep or long
an investigation.

Our leaders should ask themselves. If we are stampeded into this war,
whose interests are served? For it is certainly not Assad’s and
certainly not America’s.

We are told Obama intends to hit Syria with cruise missiles for just a
few days to punish Assad and deter any future use of gas, not to topple
his regime. After a few hundred missiles and a thousand dead Syrians,
presumably, we call it off.

Excuse me, but as Casey Stengel said, “Can’t anybody here play this game?”

Nations that start wars and attack countries, as Gen. Tojo and Adm.
Yamamoto can testify, do not get to decide how wide the war gets, how
long it goes on or how it ends.

If the United States attacks Damascus and Syria’s command and
control, under the rules of war Syria would be within its rights to
strike Washington, the Pentagon and U.S. bases all across the Middle
East.

Does Obama really want to start a war, the extent and end of which he
cannot see, that is likely to escalate, as its promoters intend and
have long plotted, into a U.S. war on Iran? Has the election in Iran of a
new president anxious to do a deal with America on Iran’s nuclear
program caused this panic in the War Party?

If we think the markets reacted badly to a potential U.S. strike on
Syria, just wait for that big one to start. Iran has a population the
size of Syria, Afghanistan and Iraq combined, and sits astride the
Straits of Hormuz through which the free world’s oil flows.

And who will be our foremost fighting ally in Syria should we attack
Assad’s army? The Al-Nusra Front, an arm of al-Qaida and likely
successor to power, should Assad fall.

No comments:

This website is dedicated to a renewal of Christian culture. It is inspired by Sir Winston Churchill, a valiant defender of Christian civilization, who believed "we have a great treasure to guard; that the inheritance in our possession represents the prolonged achievement of the centuries." With Churchill, we believe that a "fraternal association" of the English-speaking peoples must "for their own safety and for the good of all walk together in majesty, in justice and in peace.”